Double-Blind Data Verification for Machine Learning Quality Control

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current automated data quality control methods using machine learning and artificial intelligence face challenges due to limited data availability and inefficiencies in verifying data accuracy, requiring excessive time and resources.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented system for double blinded verification that includes a data extraction module, verification module, comparison module, and quality check module, utilizing machine learning to extract and verify data points across multiple levels by different users, enabling accurate and efficient quality control through a multi-level verification process.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If automated technology such as machine learning and artificial intelligence techniques are used for quality control of data, then productivity is improved, but reliability deteriorates due to limited data availability and insufficient verification accuracy

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedata verification efficiencyVSAvoiddata verification accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The verification process is segmented into multiple independent levels: first-level verification by multiple first users, second-level verification by multiple second users, and third-level verification by multiple third users. Each level independently verifies different aspects of the data, with the number of verifiers at each level being different. This segmentation allows automated technology to process data efficiently at each stage while maintaining reliability through layered independent verification.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements feedback mechanisms where verification results from each level are fed back to subsequent levels. Third users verify not only the original extracted data but also the verification results from first and second users. This multi-level feedback loop ensures that errors are detected and corrected at appropriate stages, maintaining high reliability while allowing automated processing to maintain productivity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Reliability

If multiple levels of verification are implemented to improve data accuracy, then reliability is improved, but loss of time increases due to excessive verification steps

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedata quality control accuracyVSAvoidverification time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies partial verification actions at each level rather than requiring complete re-verification of all data. First users verify initial extracted data, second users verify results from first users, and third users verify results from both first and second users. This partial action approach ensures reliability through multiple verification levels while reducing time loss by avoiding redundant full verifications at each stage.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary verification actions at earlier levels to catch and correct errors before they propagate. By having first users perform initial verification and second users perform intermediate verification, potential errors are addressed preliminarily, reducing the burden on third-level verification and overall verification time while maintaining reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Reliability

If manual data verification is performed to ensure data accuracy, then reliability is improved, but productivity deteriorates due to excessive time and expense requirements

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedata verification accuracyVSAvoiddata processing speed
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system merges automated data extraction technology with multi-level manual verification processes. Automated machine learning models extract data points from documents efficiently, while multiple users at different levels independently verify the extracted data. This combination maintains high productivity through automated extraction while ensuring reliability through structured manual verification at critical stages.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Solution Approach 2:

The verification system acts as an intermediary layer between automated data extraction and final data usage. Multiple users at different verification levels independently check extracted data points, serving as intermediaries that ensure accuracy without completely replacing automated processing. This intermediary verification maintains productivity by allowing automated extraction to proceed while ensuring reliability through targeted manual review.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentUS20250245554A1System for quality control of data by double blinded verification and a method thereof
Publication Date: 2025.07.31 BRIGHTLEAF SOLUTIONS INC
  • US20250245554A1 patent drawing
  • US20250245554A1 patent drawing
  • US20250245554A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A system to perform quality control of data by double blinded verification is disclosed. The system includes a processing subsystem which includes a data extraction module for parsing one or more documents to extract a plurality of data points by using machine learning model to generate a first transaction and a plurality of sub-transactions, a verification module verifies each of the plurality of sub-transactions individually by a first user and a second user respectively, a comparison module compares the verified results of the plurality of sub-transactions to identify a plurality of differences and filters and marks the plurality of differences in the verified results, a quality check module generates a second transaction by using the machine learning model, assigns the second transaction with the marked differences to a third user for a subsequent review, and updates the plurality of datapoints in response to the review made by a third user.